North/South Language Implementation Body: Budget

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the budget for 2003 for both sections of the Language Implementation Body; and how it compares with the budget for 2002.

Baroness Amos: The approved budgets for 2002 and 2003 for the North/South Language Implementation Body are set out in the following table. The budget for 2003 has been revised in line with the revised business plans for the Irish Language Agency and the Ulster-Scots Agency.
	
		£ million 
		
			 Body/Agency 2002 Budget 2003 Budget Revised 2003 Budget 
			 Language Body 11.97 11.33 12.95 
			 Irish Language Agency 10.55 9.98 11.41 
			 Ulster-Scots Agency 1.42 1.35 1.54

Northern Ireland: Public Sector Pension Schemes

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the cost, for each of the last three years, of the six largest public sector pension schemes in Northern Ireland in terms of:
	(a) total employees' contributions;
	(b) total employers' contributions and current percentage;
	(c) total expenditure on paying members' pensions and benefits; and
	(d) the annual overall difference between the scheme's income and expenditure.

Baroness Amos: The information requested by the noble Lord requires considerable cross-departmental co-ordination to collate. I will write as soon as possible, a copy of the letter will be placed in the Library.

East Belfast: Holywood Arches Pedestrian Crossing

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to create a pedestrian crossing at the heart of the Holywood Arches area in East Belfast.

Baroness Amos: The Chief Executive of Roads Service has written to the noble Lord. A copy of the letter has been placed in the Library.

Killinchy: Sewage Disposal Works

Lord Kilclooney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the revised timetable for applications for planning permission for the sewage disposal works at Killinchy, County Down; and when it is planned to complete this scheme.

Baroness Amos: The chief executive of Water Service has written to the noble Lord. A copy of the letter will be placed in the Library.

Special European Union Programmes Body

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 8 September (WA 8), why proportionality of the Special European Union Programmes Body was taken into consideration in the consideration of the 2003 budget; and why the proportionality of the Ulster-Scots Agency was not considered.

Baroness Amos: I refer the noble Lord to the Answer given on 8 September 2003 (WA 8).
	A revision to the proportionality of funding for the 2003 budget for the Ulster-Scots Agency was not considered necessary as there were no new factors arising to merit a change in proportionality.

North/South Ministerial Council:Business Plan

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Who developed and approved the business plan for the North/South Ministerial Council; what are the objectives of the council; which body monitors them; and whether they will lodge a copy of the business plan in the Library of the House.

Baroness Amos: The North/South Ministerial Council Joint Secretariat does not have a composite plan. The Northern Ireland side of the joint secretariat contributes to the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) business planning process. Relevant actions and targets are included in the OFMDFM Service Delivery Agreement (SDA) for 2003–04, a copy of which is in the Library. The Service Delivery Agreement is monitored by the OFMDFM Board. The objective of the joint secretariat is to support the North/South Ministerial Council.

North/South Implementation Bodies: Budgets

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they discuss with the Government of Eire the budgets for North/South Implementation Bodies but not the issue of proportionality of contributors; and, if so, why.

Baroness Amos: The budgets of North/South Implementation Bodies and the proportionality of contribution are agreed by the UK and Irish Governments in accordance with the arrangements under the agreement made by the exchange of notes between the two Governments dated 19 November 2002.

Northern Ireland: Nomenclature

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 29 October (WA 39) concerning the incorrect title given to Northern Ireland by the North/South Ministerial Council, on how many occasions the incorrect title was used; what were those occasions: and why the title was incorrect; and
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 29 October (WA 39) concerning the incorrect title given to Northern Ireland by the North/South Ministerial Council, what is their policy regarding the naming of Northern Ireland; whether they issued instructions on this point to departments; if so, what those instructions said, and why they were not adhered to in this case; and
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 29 October (WA 39) concerning the incorrect title given to Northern Ireland by the North/South Ministerial Council, who took the decision to use the word "North"; and why the occasion referred to was considered less formal; and
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 29 October (WA 39), what is meant by "accepted usage".

Baroness Amos: "Accepted usage" is usage which is readily and accurately understood. Terms such as "North" and "South" are readily and accurately understood when used in the context of the North/South Ministerial Council and the North/South Implementation Bodies.
	Reference to Northern Ireland as "the North", although not the legal title of the jurisdiction, is by accepted usage, understood to mean Northern Ireland. The use of the term is not incorrect in documents in which there is no requirement to use the legal title.
	As board members of North/South Implementation Bodies are familiar with the word "North" when referring to Northern Ireland it was felt appropriate to use the less formal terminology term on this occasion.
	No specific instructions on this matter have been issued by the North/South Ministerial Council Joint Secretariat.

Northern Ireland Commission for Employment Tribunals: Recruitment

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 4 November (WA 88), what is the recruitment process for the president, vice-president and chairmen of the Northern Ireland Commission for Employment Tribunals; and how their salaries are agreed.

Baroness Amos: The equivalent of employment tribunals in Northern Ireland is the industrial tribunals and the Fair Employment Tribunal. There is no commission for these tribunals. Recruitment to all judicial posts in the tribunals is by open competition following public advertisement. Holders of these posts must be barristers or solicitors of seven years standing.
	The remuneration of the president, the vice-president and the full-time chairmen is determined by Government having regard to recommendations contained in the report of the Review Body on Senior Salaries.
	The part-time chairmen are paid the same daily fee as part-time chairmen of the employment tribunals in England, Scotland and Wales as determined by the Department of Trade and Industry.

Northern Ireland Assembly: Elections

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the announcement of elections to the Northern Ireland Assembly on 26 November 2003 will prevent communication between officials from the Northern Ireland Office and Members of both Houses of Parliament dealing with reserved and excepted matters.

Baroness Amos: The business of Government continues during the election period. It is right that the citizens of Northern Ireland should continue to receive the benefits of effective government. But at the same time, it is important that the Government try to conduct their business in a way which would not interfere with the electoral contest between the competing candidates and parties.
	With that in mind, officials in the Northern Ireland Office should aim to ensure that all candidates in the election and their respective parties are treated fairly and equitably; and exercise caution about taking policy decisions or initiatives which might appear to favour a particular candidate or party.

Ulster-Scots Agency

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President on 17 June (WA 87) concerning the budget of the Ulster-Scots Agency for 2003, whether the only consideration for the budget was pressure on public expenditure in the Republic of Ireland; whether this was an acceptable reason for a delay in the implementation of its policy in a part of the United Kingdom; and, if not, whether they will ensure that such a reason is not accepted again.

Baroness Amos: The budget for the Ulster-Scots Agency for 2003 was agreed on a joint North/South basis as part of the overall budget for the North/South Language Body. Pressure on public expenditure in the Republic of Ireland was one of a number of factors considered in agreeing the budget for the body.
	Whilst available resources and prevailing commitments are always a factor in terms of policy implementation, I understand that a revised business plan for the Language Body has been received by the sponsor departments, and that the budget will be increased.

Northern Ireland Legislation: Religious Discrimination

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What legislation has been enacted for Northern Ireland since 1 January 1998 which has discriminated against anyone on the grounds of religion.

Baroness Amos: Sections 46 and 47 of the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 2000 make provision that all suitably qualified applicants to the post of police trainee will be recruited on the basis of 50 per cent of Roman Catholics and 50 per cent non-Roman Catholics. These same sections also make provision that where there are six or more police support staff posts at the same level which are to be filled at or around the same time then appointment will also be on the basis of 50 per cent Roman Catholic and 50 per cent non-Roman Catholic.

Northern Ireland: Civil Service Smoking Chambers

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What legal advice they have received about their actions in creating 144 smoking chambers for the civil service in Northern Ireland; and whether they are liable for any subsequent damage to the health of employees.

Baroness Amos: It is not government practice to disclose whether they have sought legal advice or the content of any advice obtained.

Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the mission statement for the Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure for the years 2003 and 2004; whether it includes the concept of developing cultural understanding and tolerance, and, if not, why not.

Baroness Amos: The business year 2003–04 is covered by the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure's (DCAL) current Corporate Strategy 2001–2004. This strategy includes a vision of Northern Ireland as a "confident, creative, informed and prosperous community".
	The department is working towards this vision by encouraging cultural understanding and tolerance coupled with a sense of social responsibility and inclusion.
	"Promoting and celebrating cultural diversity and individual creativity" is one of six goals contained in the strategy. This goal focuses on contributing to improved levels of understanding of and within our community and on addressing fundamental issues of mistrust, by proactively promoting and celebrating, in partnership with others, the richness of our cultural diversity.

Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much the employment of the economists in the Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure costs per year; whether, as a unit of staff, they have submitted a business plan; and how is their performance measured.

Baroness Amos: The total annual salary costs for the two economists who work in DCAL is £77k per annum. The economist unit is fully integrated into the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure's balanced scorecard business planning process, and is subject to the same monitoring as the rest of the core department. The unit's staff are also subject to the same personal performance appraisal arrangements as staff in the rest of the core department.

Northern Ireland: Employment and Smoking

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether under equality law in Northern Ireland a potential employer is permitted to ask an applicant for a job if he or she is a smoker; if not, why; and whether it is possible for an organisation to employ only non-smokers.

Baroness Amos: There is no equality law in Northern Ireland that deals specifically with the employment of smokers. How employers deal with the issue of employment and smoking is a matter for individual employers.

North/South Ministerial Council: Equality of Status

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Under the arrangements for the North/South Ministerial Council, whether the departments of the Government of Eire are given equal status to the government departments in Northern Ireland; and, if so, whether it is possible for the Government of Eire to insist on agreement from the Northern Ireland departments for any decision.

Baroness Amos: All decisions under the Exchange of Notes of 19 November 2002 are required to be made by agreement between the British and Irish Governments. It is therefore not possible for either the British or Irish Governments to insist on the agreement of the other.

IRA Terrorism: Libyan-supplied Weapons

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 8 October (WA 61), whether Libyan-supplied weapons have been used by the IRA, if so, in which incidents; whether there were any fatalities; what was the cost of any damage caused; and what were the amounts of any compensation paid to businesses and families.

Baroness Amos: There is evidence that Libya has been responsible in the past for supplying quantities of light and heavy weapons and explosives to the Provisional IRA. Compilation of the other information requested could only be done at disproportionate cost.

Northern Ireland: Devolution

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether devolution of central government functions in Northern Ireland to elected representatives or institutions can be achieved by secondary legislation, or whether it requires primary legislation.

Baroness Amos: The restoration of devolved government in Northern Ireland as it operated until October last year would be achieved by an order under Section 2(2) of the Northern Ireland Act 2000, subject to the affirmative procedure. The legislative mechanism used for any future devolution of central government functions in Northern Ireland would depend in part on the nature of the functions in question.

Zimbabwe: Aid

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Answer by the Lord President on 10 November (HL Deb, col. 1088), on what basis they are able to claim that no irregularities have been detected recently in the distribution of food aid in Zimbabwe.

Baroness Amos: It is the agreed policy of the World Food Programme and other donor agencies working in Zimbabwe that relevant operations will be suspended in the event of significant incidents of political interference with international food aid programmes. There have been no significant incidents of this kind in recent months and no suspensions have therefore been needed. For the period of July to September 2003, minor incidents were reported affecting 6 per cent of World Food Programme's food distributions. Of these, the vast majority were related to minor theft and crowd control, with only 0.9 per cent of monitored food distributions experiencing incidents with a suspected political element. All of these incidents were resolved quickly with local authorities using agreed procedures.

Zimbabwe: Aid

Lord Astor of Hever: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Answer by the Lord President on 10 November (HL Deb, cols. 1085–88), what processes are in place to monitor the impartial delivery of food aid in Zimbabwe and its security from interference after distribution to beneficiaries.

Baroness Amos: The World Food Programme (WFP) agreed a new Memorandum of Understanding with the Zimbabwe Government earlier this year, which renewed rigorous procedures for international food aid. These procedures involve independent beneficiary selection and distribution solely on the basis of need. WFP also undertake post-distribution monitoring which involves visiting households that are receiving food aid in order to assess their satisfaction with the operating procedures and the effect the food is having on their health and livelihoods. In all cases where irregularities are detected, incidents are immediately reported, followed up, and appropriate actions taken in consultation with local authorities.
	DfID has recently committed £0.5 million to enhance WFP's capacity to monitor food distributions, including post-distribution monitoring.

Guantanamo Bay: Judicial Procedures

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answers by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 3 November (WA 67–68), whether the Attorney-General, in discussions with the United States Administration, has raised the issue that military commissions must be independent and impartial in accordance with the obligations imposed upon the United States by the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; and
	Further to the Written Answers by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 3 November (WA 67–68), whether the Attorney-General, in discussions with the United States Administration, has raised the issue that the rules published by the United States Government for the trial by military commissions of British citizens and others held at Guantanamo provide that a guilty verdict may be made by a two-thirds majority of the commission; and
	Further to the Written Answers by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 3 November (WA 67–68), whether the Attorney-General, in discussions with the United States Administration, has raised the issue that the rules published by the United States Government for the trial by military commissions of British citizens and others held at Guantanamo provide that potentially exculpatory information may be withdrawn from military defence counsel if the prosecution does not intend to introduce such evidence at trial; and
	Further to the Written Answers by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 3 November (WA 67–68), whether the Attorney-General, in discussions with the United States Administration, has raised the issue that the rules published by the United States Government for the trial by military commissions of British citizens and others held at Guantanamo provide for a jurisdiction in areas not previously subject to the laws of war; and
	Further to the Written Answers by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 3 November (WA 67–68), whether the Attorney-General, in discussions with the United States Administration, has raised the issue that the rules published by the United States Government for the trial by military commissions of British citizens and others held at Guantanamo are under the control of the President of the United States with no right of appeal to a civil court.

Lord Goldsmith: The Government have made clear that they have serious concerns about the proposed military commissions. I have held five rounds of talks with the US Administration with the objective of ensuring that the British detainees in Guantanamo Bay, if prosecuted, are assured of a fair trial and to make clear the Government's opposition to the use of the death penalty. The Government do not intend to give a running commentary on these continuing discussions.

Law Officers' Advice: Disclosure

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answers by the Attorney-General on 6 November (WA 128–129), whether the study by Edwards, the Attorney-General, Politics and the Public Interest (1984) is correct in stating that the constitutional convention "enables considerations of political advantage or embarrassment to govern the decision whether to reveal" advice from the Law Officers; and, if not, what is their understanding of the correct position.

Lord Goldsmith: By long-standing convention, observed by successive governments, the fact of and substance of the Law Officers' advice is not disclosed outside government. This convention is referred to in paragraph 24 of the Ministerial Code. This enables the Government to obtain frank and full legal advice in confidence, as everyone else can. The exceptions to this are rare and are made where there is an overwhelming public interest in disclosure.

Law Officers' Advice: Disclosure

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answers by the Attorney-General on 6 November (WA 128–129), whether Erskine May, Parliamentary Practice is correct in stating that the constitutional convention that the opinions of the Law Officers of the Crown are confidential and so are not generally disclosed is subject to the qualification that "if a Minister deems it expedient that such opinions should be made known for the information of the House, he is entitled to cite them in debate", and, if not, what is their understanding of the correct position.

Lord Goldsmith: The extract from Erskine May, to which the noble Lord refers, paraphrases a statement by Lord Palmerston when Prime Minister in a debate in the House of Commons in 1865. However, the statement was addressing the question whether there was anything contrary to the rules of the House in reading or citing any opinion of the Law Officers and not the circumstances in which the convention on non-disclosure of the Law Officers' advice may be departed from.

Mr Hadi Soleimanpour: Order to Proceed

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What were the reasons given to the Bow Street Magistrates' Court that led them to extend the date by which a decision must be reached as to the issue of an Order to Proceed in the matter of the Argentinean request for the extradition of Mr Hadi Soleimanpour.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The court's deadline for receipt of an Order to Proceed in Mr Soleimanpour's case was initially set as 23 October. Shortly before that date, the Home Office received a substantial amount of further material in support of the Argentinean extradition request. To enable that material to be carefully considered, the court acceded to an application under the Extradition Act 1989 for the Order to Proceed deadline to be extended to 13 November. It was decided on 11 November not to issue an order and to cancel the warrant for Mr Soleimanpour's provisional arrest.

Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001: Detention of Foreign Nationals

Lord Tomlinson: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many foreign nationals have been detained under Part IV of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Sixteen foreign nationals have so far been detained using powers in Part IV of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security (ATCS) Act 2001. Eight were detained in December 2001, one in February 2002, two in April 2002, one in October 2002, one in November 2002, two in January 2003 and one in October 2003. One further individual has been certified under Part IV of the ATCS Act in August 2003 but is detained under other powers.
	Of the total detained, two have voluntarily left the United Kingdom. The other 14 remain in detention.
	The Home Secretary's decisions to detain these individuals were made on the basis of detailed and compelling evidence. That evidence is being examined by the Special Immigration Appeals Commission as the individuals' appeals are heard, as provided for under the ATCS Act. The commission is equivalent to the High Court. It has the power to overturn his decisions.
	Where terrorism is concerned, our paramount responsibility is to ensure public safety and national security. So long as the public emergency subsists, where a person is suspected of terrorism but cannot currently be removed and for whom a criminal prosecution is not an option, we believe that it is necessary and proportionate to provide for extended detention, pending removal.

Armed Forces Pension Scheme

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What benefits will be payable when the planned changes to the Armed Forces Pension Scheme take effect in 2005 to war widows aged 70 or over who are:
	(a) pre-1973 war widows with their own state retirement pension;
	(b) pre-1973 war widows without their own state retirement pension;
	(c) post-1973 war widows with their own state retirement pension; and
	(d) post-1973 war widows without their own state retirement pension.

Lord Bach: Current widows will not be affected by the introduction of the new Armed Forces Pension Scheme (AFPS) as it is not retrospective. Subject to legislative progress through both Houses, the new AFPS will have an effective date of 6 April 2005 for new entrants to the Armed Forces. Current members of the AFPS will have the opportunity to transfer to the new scheme as soon as possible in a two-year transition period. Members who have already retired and their dependants will remain with their current arrangements.

Gulf War 1990–91: Vaccines

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 6 November (WA 140) and given their disclosures on 9 October of shortcomings in medical record-keeping during and after the first Gulf conflict, how the Defence, Science and Technology Laboratory, Porton Down, defines a "valid 'worst case'" scenario in regard to the timing, environmental and other conditions pertaining when the 50,000 plus veterans of conflict received their vaccinations.

Lord Bach: The full valid "worse case" schedule followed in the Vaccines Interactions Research Programme at the Defence, Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl), Porton Down was as follows:
	
		
			 Time  
			 Day 0 First Anthrax First Pertussis Polio (oral) Yellow fever 
			 Day 3 Typhoid Tetanus Hep B 
			 Day 6 Meningococcal Meningitis Cholera 
			 Day 15 Pyridostigmine Bromide  (NAPS) for 28 days (stopped  day 44) 
			 Day 23 First Plague Second Anthrax Second Pertussis 
			 Day 51 Second Plague Third Anthrax 
		
	
	Dstl and the independent panel of experts overseeing this complex research programme recognise that it would have been impossible to devise a single schedule that would reflect the actual experience of all veterans of the 1990–91 Gulf conflict. The schedule used reflects a valid "worse case" in that 10 vaccines were administered over a short time period with booster doses of some vaccines given 23 and 51 days after the first vaccines. Pyridostigmine bromide, the active ingredient of Nerve Agent Pre-Treatment Set (NAPS) tablets, was administered continuously for 28 days during the 51 day schedule. As environmental and other conditions pertaining at the time individuals received their medical countermeasures are not part of the Vaccines Interactions Research Programme, they do not form part of the "worse case" scenario.

Health and Safety Commission

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether additional funding is being sought by the Health and Safety Commission; and whether an increase in the numbers of inspectors and the amount of preventive work, and improvements in the commission's scientific capacity will assist the cost-effective safety regulation of the railways (taking into account the self-regulating role of the Railway Standards and Safety Board).

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The Health and Safety Commission will put forward a submission under the 2004 Spending Review to the Department for Work and Pensions for inclusion in its bid to Treasury. HSC will apply the resources provided by government to deliver the targets set by government in the most efficient and effective way. HSC will develop plans for work in the rail industry that optimise the cost-effective safety regulation of the railways.

Health and Safety Commission

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the terms of reference of the Health and Safety Commission in respect of (a) road transport, (b) rail transport; and (c) other industry sectors; and what is the budget expenditure by the commission on each.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The current system of health and safety at work in Great Britain derives from the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (the 1974 Act). The main purposes of the 1974 Act and its relevant statutory provisions are to:
	secure the health, safety and welfare of people at work;
	protect the public against risks to health and safety arising from work activities; and
	control dangerous substances.
	The Health and Safety Commission's statutory duties include:
	submitting proposals for regulations to Ministers after consultation with appropriate government departments and other bodies;
	providing information and advice to Ministers (among others);
	arranging for the operation of an information and advisory service;
	arranging for research to be carried out and published and encouraging research by others;
	arranging for the provision of training and information and encouraging its provision by others; and
	paying to the executive sums considered appropriate for it to perform its functions.
	The Department for Transport (HSE's then sponsoring department) and the commission made an agency agreement, which came into effect on 1 December 1990. Under this, HSC agreed to perform delegated railway safety functions, under the 1974 Act, on behalf of the Secretary of State for Transport.
	Health and safety law is applicable to all work activities, including driving. Unlike railways, where HSE is the primary health and safety regulator, safety on the roads is subject to a variety of regulations enforced by other agencies.
	It has been the policy of successive governments that HSE should not generally seek to enforce health and safety at work legislation where public and worker safety can adequately be protected by more specific and detailed law enforced by another authority. Road transport is regulated by road traffic law, which is enforced by the police and others, such as the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency.
	A breakdown of budget expenditure by road transport, rail transport and other industry sectors is not available. HSC's gross budget expenditure for 2003–04 is £262 million, of which £12.9 million is allocated to the rail-related activity.

Disabled People: Employment

Lord Graham of Edmonton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they offer any programme, addressed specifically to the needs of disabled people, in order to assist them in finding employment.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: We have a wide range of programmes that offer support in helping disabled people secure work where they are ready and able to do so, including Workstep, Access to Work, and Work Preparation. Jobcentre Plus advisory services and the specialist programmes are available irrespective of benefit (if any) claimed.
	The New Deal for Disabled People is the first national employment programme specifically designed to help disabled people move into and keep jobs. Since the national extension of the programme began, it has helped over 20,000 people into jobs and more than 57,000 have registered with job brokers to actively pursue employment.

Licensing Act 2003

Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will lay before Parliament the secondary legislation under the Licensing Act 2003 on (a) the procedures to be followed in making an application for a licence under the Act; (b) the procedures for applying for "grandfather rights" for both a personal and premises licence; (c) the procedures to be followed in applying for a variation to a premises licence; (d) the fees to be paid for a personal licence; (e) the fees to be paid for an application for a premises licence; (f) the annual scale of charges to be levied on premises licences; and (g) the annual fee to be paid to register an interest in a premises licence.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Government are currently preparing this secondary legislation in consultation with stakeholders including those representing local authorities. We intend to lay before Parliament all the secondary legislation that is required for transition to the new licensing regime, including those referred to by the noble Lord, over the next three months.

Licensing Act 2003

Lord Redesdale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What additional funds they are allocating to local authorities in order for them to discharge their functions under the Licensing Act 2003.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Licensing Act 2003 provides for fees to be payable to the licensing authorities for discharging their functions under the Act, for example, for applications for premises licences or club premises certificates. The fees will be set centrally by the Secretary of State at a level which will allow for full cost recovery in respect of the administration, inspection and enforcement of the new regime. No additional funding will therefore be required. Where an exemption from the requirement to pay a fee has been granted by the Government, the associated costs will be met from central government funds.

Licensing Act 2003

Lord Redesdale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What recommendations they will make to local authorities with regard to how much they should charge applicants for (a) a premises licence; (b) a club premises licence; (c) a temporary event notice; and (d) a personal licence, when the Licensing Act comes into effect as expected in January 2005.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Licensing Act 2003 provides that the fees which licensing authorities will charge for applications etc for licences, certificates and notices will be set centrally by the Secretary of State. The regulations setting out the fee levels will be made in the next few months. The regulatory impact assessment which accompanied the Licensing Bill contains estimates of the fee levels and is available from the Library of the House.

Public Schools: Charitable Status and Tax Relief

Lord Lea of Crondall: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the annual tax relief for public schools with charitable status in the last financial year.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Information is not available on the costs of charitable reliefs broken down by type of charity. The available information relates to all charities and is published in Table 10.2 of Inland Revenue Statistics at www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/stats/charities/menu.htm

Export of Cultural Objects

Baroness Turner of Camden: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will be laying under the Export Control Act 2002 (i) an order relating to the export of cultural objects and (ii) guidance about the exercising of licensing powers on cultural objects.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Earlier today, the Government laid the Export of Objects of Cultural Interest (Control) Order 2003 (SI 2003/2759) made under the auspices of the Export Control Act 2002 before Parliament. In addition to this the statutory guidance required under the same Act about the general principles to be followed when exercising licensing powers on objects of cultural interest was also laid.

Newspapers and Periodicals: Resale Price Maintenance

Lord Peston: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the law relating to the prohibition of resale price maintenance applies to the retail sale of newspapers and periodicals.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Resale price maintenance is a form of price fixing, which is prohibited by the Competition Act 1998. The Act applies to the sale of newspapers and periodicals, as it does to other sectors of the economy. Enforcement of the Act is a matter for the Office of Fair Trading.

EU Working Time Directive

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the proposed European Union regulation to remove an individual's right to opt out of the Working Time Directive envisages the exclusion of certain groups of people or types of employment, such as agriculture or horticulture; whether, under the proposed regulations, the period over which the hours worked would be calculated would be extended; and, if so, to what.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: There are at present no European Union proposals to remove the working time opt-out. The European Commission intends to issue an initial communication on the working time opt-out, the definition of working time with regard to on-call time and the working time reference period, around the end of November. We are not expecting the communication to contain any legislative proposals. There will then follow a consultation period before the Commission produces formal proposals, but it is too early to say what these will be.

Manufacturing

Lord Taylor of Warwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they will take to address the current fall in output in the manufacturing industry.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Manufacturing industry remains under considerable pressure in the UK, as it does in other major economies.
	We are doing all we can to help to support UK manufacturers with the actions we are taking forward as part of the Government's manufacturing strategy. By maintaining a stable macroeconomic climate, together with measures such as extending the research and development tax credit to all companies, and establishing the Manufacturing Advisory Service, we are helping our manufacturers to succeed in difficult global conditions. The Manufacturing Advisory Service has been a real success as a major source of advice and support for manufacturers, and has added value worth more than £28 million to firms that have taken up its services since it launched in April 2002.

Primary Care Practices: List Size

Baroness Gardner of Parkes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the July census date for general practitioner practices disadvantages general practitioners who operate student health services on or near campuses, given that students finishing their courses will have been removed from the general practitioner lists; and, if so, how they propose to make an adjustment to compensate for this adverse effect.

Lord Warner: As part of the new contract for general medical services, primary care practices will receive a proportion of their income related to the size of their practice list. The payments that relate to practice list size will be updated every three months based on data collected on practice lists at the beginning of the quarter. This means that practices that keep their practice lists up to date should not be disadvantaged.

Hunting Bill

Lord Strathclyde: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Answer by the Lord Chancellor on 18 September (HL Deb, col. 1066) that "attempts were made to reach a consensus. This House rejected an elected element and voted for an appointed-only Chamber" and that the Government intended to proceed to legislate for an appointed-only House of Lords, whether the same principle will be applied in the case of hunting, where unsuccessful attempts have been made to reach a consensus and where the House of Lords has on a free vote rejected a ban on hunting and voted for registered hunting; and, if not, why not.

Lord Whitty: Legislation is normally passed by agreement between the two Houses of Parliament. If the House of Lords fails to pass any Bill, for whatever reason, it is a matter for the House of Commons to decide what to do; in the case of the Hunting Bill, on a free vote.

Better Regulation Task Force Report: Independent Regulators

Lord Taylor of Warwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider that there is a need for 108 independent regulators, as identified by the Better Regulation Task Force report, Independent Regulators.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: It is for individual government departments to decide the most effective means of delivering a policy objective, and whether to set up an independent regulator.
	The Government continue to keep public bodies under review and will establish a new body only where it is the most effective means of discussing a specific function.
	The Government welcome the contribution that the Better Regulation Task Force's report makes to this area and will be responding to the recommendations early in the new year.

Ministers: Training

Lord Norton of Louth: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What training is provided for senior Ministers in (a) the structure and administration of government; and (b) the constitutional framework and principles within which Ministers operate.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The Ministerial Code provides advice and guidance to Ministers on these issues. Permanent Secretaries also provide advice. In addition, the Centre for Management and Policy Studies in the Cabinet Office runs an induction event for new Ministers where these issues are also covered.